From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Saks v. N.Y.C. Health and Hosp. Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 4, 2003
302 A.D.2d 213 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

114N

February 4, 2003.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen Bransten, J.), entered September 4, 2001, which denied plaintiff's motion for a default judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Ephrem Wertenteil, for plaintiff-appellant.

Grace Goodman, for defendants-respondents.

Before: Nardelli, J.P., Andrias, Buckley, Rosenberger, JJ.


The motion was properly denied on the ground that a complaint verified by counsel who does not claim personal knowledge of the facts is insufficient to support a default judgment (see Francisco v. Soto, 286 A.D.2d 573). Absent a complaint or affidavit sworn to by a person with personal knowledge of the facts, defendants were not required to show either a reasonable excuse or a meritorious defense (see Woodson v. Mendon Leasing Corp., 289 A.D.2d 158).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Saks v. N.Y.C. Health and Hosp. Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 4, 2003
302 A.D.2d 213 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Saks v. N.Y.C. Health and Hosp. Corp.

Case Details

Full title:SHLOMO SAKS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. THE NEW YORK CITY HEALTH AND…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Feb 4, 2003

Citations

302 A.D.2d 213 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
753 N.Y.S.2d 377

Citing Cases

Am. Express Travel Related Serv. Co. v. Frontline Commc'ns Inter-National, Inc.

The amended complaint is not verified, and is to a large extent made on information and belief, and, the…